↓ Skip to main content

The development and psychometric properties of a measure of clinicians’ attitudes to depression: the revised Depression Attitude Questionnaire (R-DAQ)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The development and psychometric properties of a measure of clinicians’ attitudes to depression: the revised Depression Attitude Questionnaire (R-DAQ)
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-014-0381-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Haddad, Marco Menchetti, Eamonn McKeown, André Tylee, Anthony Mann

Abstract

BackgroundDepression is a common mental disorder associated with substantial disability. It is inadequately recognised and managed, and clinicians¿ attitudes to this condition and its treatment may play a part in this. Most research in this area has used the Depression Attitude Questionnaire (DAQ), but analyses have shown this measure to exhibit problems in psychometric properties and suitability for the health professionals and settings where depression recognition may occur.MethodsWe revised the DAQ using a pooled review of findings from studies using this measure, together with a Delphi study which sought the opinions of a panel of relevant experts based in the UK, USA, Australia, and European countries (n¿=¿24) using 3 rounds of questioning to consider attitude dimensions, content, and item wording. After item generation, revision and consensus (agreement >70%) using the Delphi panel, the revised DAQ (R-DAQ) was tested with 1193 health care providers to determine its psychometric properties. Finally the test-retest reliability of the R-DAQ was examined with 38 participants.ResultsThe 22-item R-DAQ scale showed good internal consistency: Cronbach¿s alpha coefficient was 0.84; and satisfactory test-retest reliability: intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.62 (95% C.I. 0.37 to 0.78). Exploratory factor analysis favoured a three-factor structure (professional confidence, therapeutic optimism/pessimism, and a generalist perspective), which accounted for 45.3% of the variance.ConclusionsThe R-DAQ provides a revised tool for examining clinicians¿ views and understanding of depression. It addresses important weaknesses in the original measure whilst retaining items and dimensions that appeared valid. This revised scale is likely to be useful in examining attitudes across the health professional workforce and beyond the confines of the UK, and may be valuable for the purpose of evaluating training that aims to address clinicians¿ attitudes to depression. It incorporates key dimensions of attitudes with a modest number of items making it applicable to use in busy clinical settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 86 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Researcher 7 8%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 18 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 24%
Psychology 17 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Engineering 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 20 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 February 2015.
All research outputs
#18,396,431
of 22,786,691 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#3,872
of 4,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,516
of 352,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#64
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,678 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,181 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.